Category: Opinion

Any Institution The Left Doesn’t Control They Seek To Destroy

Posted on by The Daily Signal

By Jarrett Stepman for The Daily Signal

From overturning Roe v. Wade to supporting the Second Amendment and maintaining religious liberty, the Supreme Court’s recent decisions have put the left in a sour mood.

The left certainly hasn’t taken the news well.

Despite the left’s obsession with the notion that the right is all about “undermining democracy,” the left has shown little trepidation in demanding we lay waste to republican institutions that stand in opposition to its agenda.

Pleas for “court packing” from Democrats have been building for a while. Undoubtedly, those calls will become louder now, despite caution from the Biden administration. The latter hasn’t stopped plenty of prominent Democrats from acceding to the calls of activists to “burn it down”—figuratively and perhaps even literally. 

They’ve both demanded court-packing with liberal justices and called into question the Supreme Court’s legitimacy.

RELATED: Justice Alito’s Opinion Doesn’t Just Overturn Roe v. Wade, It Shreds It to Pieces

It’s become a full-blown tantrum from people used to getting their way.

“This court has lost legitimacy. They have burned whatever legitimacy they may still have had after their gun decision, after their voting decision, after their union decision,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., on ABC’s “This Week.”

“They just took the last of it and set a torch to it,” Warren said. “I believe we need to get some confidence back in our court, and that means we need more justices on the United States Supreme Court.”

Following the Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, D-N.Y., marched with protesters in front of the Supreme Court and joined in chants of “illegitimate.”

She later said that “impeachment” was on the table for Supreme Court justices, who she insinuated had lied under oath at their Senate confirmation hearings. As Tim Carney wrote in the Washington Examiner, the idea that Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch promised to uphold Roe v. Wade is completely false.

Not to be outdone, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., went off the deep end in front of the Supreme Court. “Women are going to control their bodies, no matter how they try and stop us,” Waters said. “The hell with the Supreme Court. We will defy them.”

It appears that, for the left, liberalism is the standard by which something has “legitimacy.” Any institution they don’t immediately control they seek to destroy.

RELATED: AOC Wants ‘Consequences’ For Supreme Court Justices, Impeachment For Clarence Thomas

Part of this might be fueled by their typically overwhelming institutional control, which until very recently included the Supreme Court. For half a century, the court had delivered wins for the left on numerous policy and cultural issues, even when those issues weren’t popular—or in the case of Roe v. Wade and other decisions, weren’t based on particularly sound legal reasoning.

The court could be relied upon to be the left’s sort of deus ex machina, as liberal Bloomberg columnist Noah Smith admitted.

Now, there’s certainly a case to be made that the American political system has become too reliant on courts, rather than on the democratic process, to resolve divisive legal and moral issues. That was one of the problems with Roe v. Wade. By effectively declaring that having an abortion is a “right,” the issue was taken off the table for Americans.

That issue is now going back to the American people and their local elected officials. And that’s really where it should be decided. 

Again, it’s really something to hear the left rage against unelected judges “imposing” their ideas on the country. That’s effectively what Roe v. Wade did, except without supportive language in the Constitution, like the clear text of the Second Amendment, which the justices relied on in their ruling against a New York gun law the day before they overturned Roe. 

When conservatives faced significant legal setbacks in past decades, they didn’t attempt to blow up the court or pack it with additional justices to get their way. Instead, the right worked hard to build a serious institutional and legal infrastructure in opposition, with the Federalist Society being perhaps the most noteworthy example.

With the election of President Donald Trump—who appointed three Supreme Court justices—that generational work came to fruition.

The right worked within the system to create serious and lasting change. Liberals of this generation, it seems, failed the marshmallow experiment on delayed gratification.

RELATED: Progressives Want ‘Term Limits’ For Supreme Court Justices

The left certainly didn’t learn anything from then-Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. The then-Senate majority leader used the “nuclear option” to end the Republicans’ Senate filibuster of judicial nominations in 2013, which cleared the way for Trump and Senate Republicans later getting three justices on the Supreme Court.

Oops.

It’s perhaps a lesson for conservatives today.

 If we really want to overcome the great “awokening,” we need to consider long-term plans to recapture institutions or build new ones in opposition. It’s not enough to just attack them. Short-term victory without a longer-term strategy can easily backfire.

Syndicated with permission from The Daily Signal.

The post Any Institution The Left Doesn’t Control They Seek To Destroy appeared first on The Political Insider.

Clarence Thomas, Consistent Target Of The Left, Explains ‘Right Is Still Right Even If You Stand By Yourself’

Posted on by Rusty Weiss

Clarence Thomas, the longest-serving justice and just the second black justice to serve on the Supreme Court, is a consistent target of criticism from the left.

A recently surfaced video of Thomas’ remarks to the Heritage Foundation’s 2007 President’s Club Meeting provides insight into how he weathers the constant attacks and stands on his own morals and principles.

The conservative Justice credits “an abiding faith” and a “litany of humility” as a means to remain steady in public life.

He then provides the following incredible clip about standing for what you believe in regardless of what others may be saying or doing.

RELATED: AOC Wants ‘Consequences’ For Supreme Court Justices, Impeachment For Clarence Thomas

‘Right is Still Right’

Clarence Thomas’s speeches are always a source of inspiration as he is a gifted orator. But his words ring especially true as the Supreme Court receives consistent threats from the political left in the wake of Roe v. Wade being overturned.

A majority of Americans disapprove of the decision. That doesn’t mean the Court should cower in fear and make decisions based on public opinion rather than the rule of law.

“Whether people are mad at you has nothing to do with whether you’re right,” said Thomas during the 2007 speech.

“You know, you can be in the middle of a hurricane, or you can be on a calm day. North is still north,” he continued. “You could be in a thunderstorm. North is still north. People can yell at you. North is still north.”

“It doesn’t change fundamental things. And in this business, right is still right, even if you stand by yourself.”

It is a remarkable clip about having courage in your convictions. Perhaps Chief Justice John Roberts, who frequently sides with liberals on the court for the sole purpose of maintaining integrity with the public, should take some notes.

The entire speech can be seen below.

‘F*** Clarence Thomas’

The excerpt from Clarence Thomas’s speech is especially poignant in light of recent vile attacks against him and his character.

Far-left Democrat Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has repeatedly called to impeach him.

She believes his wife’s actions, emailing White House aides about election fraud concerns during the Capitol riot, are grounds for his impeachment.

Actor Samuel L. Jackson used a racist trope in his criticism of the Roe v. Wade ruling, calling Thomas ‘Uncle Clarence’ and wondering about his thoughts on the Loving v. Virginia civil rights case on interracial marriage.

Thomas’s wife is white.

Then there is Chicago mayor Lori Lightfoot, who launched a profane attack on Clarence Thomas last week during a Pride event in the city.

“F*** Clarence Thomas,” she yelled.

Lightfoot wouldn’t be put anywhere near a mayor’s office in any sane city in America, but thrives in a liberal cesspool like Chicago.

Prior to that, she issued a “call to arms,” claiming that the Court will be “coming for us next,” even as violent threats and assassination concerns were prevalent.

Thomas recently received an assist from Justice Sonia Sotomayor – who is the exact opposite of him politically – when she offered praise for her colleague, stating he is a very personable individual who “cares deeply” about the integrity of the court.

Sotomayor said despite their differences of opinion on how to help people, she and Clarence Thomas maintain a friendship because she knows he is a “man who cares deeply about the court as an institution … about the people who work here.”

Perhaps even more important than caring, Thomas understands that “north is north” and “right is still right” no matter who stands against you.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Clarence Thomas, Consistent Target Of The Left, Explains ‘Right Is Still Right Even If You Stand By Yourself’ appeared first on The Political Insider.

Democrat Rep. Speier Wants States Banning Abortions To Force ‘Impregnator’ To Pay $350,000 ‘Bond’

Posted on by Rusty Weiss

Congresswoman Jackie Speier (D-CA), in an interview with CNN’s Jim Acosta, condemned the Supreme Court’s recent decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and suggested that states banning abortion should force the “impregnator” to post a $350,000 “bond” to help take care of the child.

Speier, who shared her personal story of abortion on the House floor in a 2011 speech, was shown a clip of that moment during an interview with Acosta on Sunday.

“I realize the luxury, frankly, that I had,” to have an abortion at the time she explained, noting that luxury was “taken away from women today across this country.”

Speier went on to express agreement with fellow Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who suggested Supreme Court Justices need to be impeached because they “lied under oath.”

“There’s no question they lied and they did that under oath. So there should be consequences,” she concurred.

That’s when things turned very, very strange.

RELATED: Justice Alito’s Opinion Doesn’t Just Overturn Roe v. Wade, It Shreds It to Pieces

Jackie Speier: Force ‘Impregnator’ to Pay a Bond

In one of the more absurd responses to the abortion ruling by the Supreme Court, Representative Jackie Speier tossed out a suggestion that state legislatures take up bills that would force the “impregnator” to post a $350,000 bond to help care for the child.

“For all those states now saying a woman can’t get an abortion, I’d suggest their legislatures require the impregnators to put up a $350,000 bond so a mother can take care of that child,” she told Acosta.

Speier appears to, like many in her party, struggle to understand how sex works and that it takes two people to create life through pregnancy. She also seems to be a bit ignorant on the state of the economy and the number of people who have $350,000 in their bank accounts.

According to Open Secrets, Speier has a net worth of over $11 million. 

Speier has made past arguments in which she focuses on the “impregnator” when it comes to abortion.

She warned in December as the case was being heard in the Supreme Court, “I think the country hasn’t seen the rage of women speaking out.”

She said pro-life laws are “intended to be misogynistic” and say nothing about the “responsibility of the impregnator.”

RELATED: Gun Rights Victory: Supreme Court Tosses New York Law Restricting Concealed Carry

Made the Argument Before

Just last month, Jackie Speier said the ‘impregnator’ should post a $300,000 bond and cited mask mandates when arguing the government shouldn’t have control of women’s bodies.

“He should be subject to a DNA test [and] required to post a $300,000 bond for the child,” she tweeted, suggesting the Supreme Court believes pregnancies are a result of “immaculate conception.”

“The same people who don’t want mask mandates imposed on their bodies are ready to take control of our uteruses,” she added.

Speier’s reaction to the abortion case is similar to that of Representative Cori Bush, who likewise wanted to focus on the ‘impregnator.’

 

In that case, Bush (D-MO) wanted to know why Congress hadn’t been taking up “sperm regulation legislation.”

“You know, there’s a reason why we don’t see sperm regulation legislation,” Bush said in an interview with MSNBC’s Joy Reid. “There’s a reason why we don’t see mandated vasectomies.”

“You know, the very idea that we would take away men’s bodily autonomy is outrageous, like, it’s unfathomable,” she added.

“But truthfully sperm are busy. It’s busy. Who is regulating that? Who is saying something about it? … Where is that legislation?”

Speier, meanwhile, has argued that abortion is such a ‘luxury’ in today’s world that it amounts to little more than one having their wisdom teeth extracted.

“Abortions are one of the safest procedures you could do on an outpatient basis, safer than doing an endoscopy or doing a wisdom teeth extraction,” said Speier.

Of course, that’s not true. It only applies if you’re willing to completely overlook the fact that neither an endoscopy nor wisdom teeth extraction involves the death of a baby.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Democrat Rep. Speier Wants States Banning Abortions To Force ‘Impregnator’ To Pay $350,000 ‘Bond’ appeared first on The Political Insider.

AOC Wants ‘Consequences’ For Supreme Court Justices, Impeachment For Clarence Thomas

Posted on by Rusty Weiss

Far-left Democrat Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) is calling for there to be “consequences” for Supreme Court Justices she claims “lied under oath” and suggested they need to face impeachment.

The Supreme Court on Friday overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion at the federal level.

Some Senators have claimed that by stating during their Senate confirmation hearings that Roe v. Wade was “settled” – which it was at the time they went through the nomination process – Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh “lied under oath.”

Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), for example, released a statement indicating he “trusted Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh when they testified under oath that they also believed” the landmark ruling was “settled legal precedent.”

“What I believe that the President and the Democratic Party needs to come to terms with is that this is not just a crisis of Roe, this is a crisis of our democracy,” AOC said in an interview with Chuck Todd on Sunday.

The congresswoman was then asked about investigations being launched as a means to remedy the left’s perceived grievance.

RELATED: Justice Alito’s Opinion Doesn’t Just Overturn Roe v. Wade, It Shreds It to Pieces

AOC Calls for Impeachment of Supreme Court Justices

Being a day that ends in ‘Y,’ AOC explained to Todd that investigations and possibly impeachment were the way to go following the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Todd asked her if she thinks “the House Judiciary Committee should begin the process of an investigation” into Kavanaugh and Gorsuch. 

“If we allow Supreme Court nominees to lie under oath and secure lifetime appointments … we must see that through,” she said of possible investigations.

“There must be consequences for such a deeply destabilizing action and hostile takeover of our democratic institutions,” AOC hyperventilated. “This is a crisis of legitimacy.”

AOC then focused her ire toward justice Clarence Thomas, the longest-serving justice, the second black justice, and the most conservative member currently serving on the Supreme Court.

“We have a Supreme Court Justice whose wife participated in January 6th,” AOC said failing to discern between those who wanted election fraud investigated and those who took part in the Capitol riot.

AOC has targeted Thomas for impeachment for some time, following reports that Thomas’ wife, Virginia Thomas, exchanged text messages with Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows about alleged election fraud.

“Clarence Thomas should resign,” she has tweeted.

RELATED: AOC Calls To Impeach Clarence Thomas, The Only Black Supreme Court Justice

Ocasio-Cortez Calls Court ‘Illegitimate’

Kavanaugh has also been the subject of smears from the New York socialist, having been maligned by AOC for being “credibly” accused of sexual assault.

“Reminder that Brett Kavanaugh *still* remains credibly accused of sexual assault on multiple accounts [with] corroborated details [and] this year the FBI admitted it never fully investigated,” she tweeted in December.

“Yet the court is letting him decide on whether to legalize forced birth in the US,” Ocasio-Cortez added.

In reality, a Senate Judiciary report from 2018 which investigated the sexual misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh showed there was “no evidence” to support any of the claims that were made against him – including the testimony of Christine Blasey Ford.

After the Supreme Court’s ruling, AOC joined protesters outside the building in chanting that the Court itself is “illegitimate,” even as Kavanaugh was the victim of an assassination attempt and there have been nearly 50 attacks on pro-life centers across the country.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post AOC Wants ‘Consequences’ For Supreme Court Justices, Impeachment For Clarence Thomas appeared first on The Political Insider.

Trump Pens Epic 12-Page Response To Jan. 6 Hearings, Hints At Announcing 2024 Campaign

Posted on by Kathleen J. Anderson

Former President Donald Trump issued a massive 12-page rebuttal to the ongoing January 6th Congressional hearings that have accused him of inciting an insurrection, and the product is pure Trump.

The bulk of Trump’s response focused on his continued allegations of election integrity issues, but includes revealing passages on what he believes are the Democrats’ real intentions behind the hearings.

President Trump asserts that the Democrats on the “Unselect Pseudo-Committee” are merely trying to distract the American people from the dining room table issues affecting voters leading up to the midterms. He also claims these hearings are primarily an attempt to subvert his ability to run for President again in 2024. 

Let’s look at what else the former President had to say in this unprecedented action from a former leader of the free world.

RELATED: Newly Released Jan. 6 Documents Reveal Officer Never Filed Report In Shooting Death of Ashli Babbitt

Smoke and Mirrors

It’s no secret that the expectation is the Democrats are poised to receive a severe whipping during the coming 2022 midterms. The chances they will lose the majority in at least one if not both houses of Congress are high.

Trump states in his dissertation:

“They (the Democrats) are desperate to change the narrative of a failing nation, without even making mention of the havoc and death caused by the radical left just months earlier.”

An homage to the state of the union today and the summer riots in 2020, he goes on to state:

“They (the Democrats) are hoping that these hearings will somehow alter their failing prospects.”

Trump and other GOP members claim that the hearings are meant to distract from economic issues such as inflation and skyrocketing gas prices. Additionally, the idea is to refocus the American voter on what happened on January 6th instead of what is happening now with rising crime and increased divisive rhetoric surrounding various social issues.

RELATED: One Of The January 6 Committee’s Conspiracy Theories About Riot Debunked By Capitol Police

An Eye Towards 2024

Since Biden’s inauguration, the former President has hinted that he is contemplating another run at the highest seat in all the land. With Trump endorsing candidates polling well and polling quite well himself, this has got to have the Democrats worried.

Trump states it plainly:

“This is merely an attempt to stop a man that is leading in every poll, against both Republicans and Democrats by wide margins, from running again for the Presidency.”

So how does the committee accomplish that alleged goal? That remains to be seen. The plan seems to be to link Trump and his allies to the claim that they deliberately lied to Americans about election fraud which then spurred the events that transpired at the Capitol on January 6th.

READ MORE: Trump’s full 12-page statement here.

Testimony from some of Trump’s former closest confidants, including his daughter, reveals that, for the most part, people were not supporting the President’s election fraud claims. Furthermore it appears they repeatedly said as much to the President. Therefore there doesn’t seem to be clear evidence that the President didn’t and, for that matter, still doesn’t believe his claims. 

The fact that he spends the bulk of his rebuttal attempting to convince Americans of his claims points to the probability that he still believes them regardless of the evidence. So then the next question is, did he purposely incite the violence?

Again, the hearing’s ability to prove intent to incite remains to be seen. Even if the committee believes they can prove anything, the decision to prosecute the former President lies with the Justice Department.

Will It Move The Needle?

According to Pew Research Poll from January, a minority believe Trump has “a lot” of responsibility for the Capitol riot. That’s down from a majority in January, 2021.

Those numbers make it hard to see how pursuing further than these hearings could help the Democrats. Democratic Congresswoman Haley Stevens of Michigan says the value of these hearings is to have “more honest conversations” regarding the events of January 6th.

There is an argument that some of us would like to have an honest conversation. I, for one, have been curious as to why there wasn’t more security on-site before the planned demonstration.

Will the hearings cover some of the security questions that have come up? I guess we will have to stay tuned.

Drama is what the Democrats are hoping for and why they hired James Goldston, the former President of ABC News, to produce the hearings as if it were a Hollywood production rather than a Congressional hearing. The hope is that it would grip the American people like a real-time documentary drama.

CNN’s Brian Stelter said about 20 million people tuned into last Thursday’s hearing. It seems like a lot but pales compared to the 38 million that tuned into the State of the Union.

RELATED: AOC Tears Up Having To Relive January 6 Footage: ‘I Am So Angry’

Following His Own Beat

The former President isn’t known for ‘falling in line.’ However, the GOP has tried very hard to have a united effort to focus on the economy and other areas where Democrats and the Biden administration are in the doghouse with the American public.

Trump’s 12-page paper focusing mainly on claims he won the Presidency goes against the GOP narrative at large. A former Trump White House aide put it:

“I think it’s fine to correct the record…but I think the vast majority of the energy should be spent on the economic issues.”

I feel this won’t be the last we hear of the former President. With more hearings scheduled, it’s sure to make for must-see TV if you can afford your cable bill or streaming subscription by then.

Read Trump’s full 12-page statement about the January 6 Committee here.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Trump Pens Epic 12-Page Response To Jan. 6 Hearings, Hints At Announcing 2024 Campaign appeared first on The Political Insider.

Lindsey Graham Cuts Deal With Bernie Sanders To Oppose ‘Election Deniers’ And ‘Defund The Police’ Candidates

Posted on by Rusty Weiss

Lindsey Graham offered to rein in pro-Trump Republican candidates who question the integrity of the 2020 election if Bernie Sanders would do the same regarding anti-police Democrats going forward.

The proposed compromise came about as the two Senators engaged in a debate as part of The Senate Project on Fox Nation.

Socialist Sanders (I-VT), during one exchange, started hammering Graham for his association with and promotion of Republicans who side with former President Donald Trump in questioning the legitimacy of the last presidential election.

“We have a former President whose name is Donald Trump. Goes around the country telling people, ‘Hey, I won the election. In fact, I probably won it by a landslide but they – they stole it. They took it away from me,’” Sanders argued.

“Now, that happens to be what we call a big lie,” added the socialist curmudgeon. He later lamented that the so-called ‘big lie’ casts doubt on the “entire system” and suggested it represents a slide to “authoritarianism.”

RELATED: New White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre Claimed the 2016 and 2018 Elections Were ‘Stolen’

Lindsey Graham Compromises With Bernie Sanders

Lindsey Graham took the bait from Bernie Sanders and offered to rein in pro-Trump Republicans who cast doubt on the 2020 election.

Graham (R-SC) insisted he “voted to certify the election” and, despite there being “some mail balloting chicanery” declared that Biden won the election.

“But what about all of the candidates out there who are trying to say that he didn’t?” Sanders chimed in. “Your Republican candidates you want people to vote for?”

“Well, I, you know … what about the people saying defund the police? You talk to them, I talk to that crowd,” Graham replied.

RELATED: Marjorie Taylor Greene Demolishes Lindsey Graham For Helping Democrats On Gun Control

Bernie’s Own Big Lie

Bernie Sanders responded to Lindsey Graham by saying, “But your crowd is a lot larger than my crowd.”

This is a statement that underscores Graham’s fumble in going the false equivalency route. He didn’t have to compare ‘defund the police’ Democrats to Republicans who call into question election results. No, that’s a whole different segment of extremists on the left.

Graham simply had to challenge Sanders to denounce Democrats who … have questioned election results.

Like White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre who said the 2016 presidential election was “stolen.”

Trump’s opponent in the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton, spent years claiming the election was stolen from her by the Russians and anybody else she could point a finger at.

“I was the candidate that they basically stole an election from,” she said.

Jean-Pierre’s boss, President Biden, cast his own doubts, agreeing with a woman at a campaign rally who said Trump was an “illegitimate president in my mind.”

“I absolutely agree,” Biden replied.

Former President Jimmy Carter believed Trump lost saying, “I think a full investigation would show that Trump didn’t actually win the election in 2016.”

Democrats, in fact, objected to the election results in 2016 officially and during the proceedings certifying electoral votes 11 separate times.

So many ‘big lies’ right there.

And Lindsey Graham didn’t even need to bring up all those Democrat election deniers. He could have just challenged Bernie Sanders himself in the debate.

Sanders, you see, claimed the 2016 nomination was stolen from him by a system “rigged” to favor Clinton. Well, he used the ‘some people are saying’ play.

When asked if he would commit to supporting Hillary in 2016, Sanders replied: “Some people say that maybe if the system was not rigged against me, I would have won the nomination.”

Democrats, dating back to Al Gore’s refusal to accept defeat in 2000, have been the party of election skepticism. They haven’t suddenly turned a corner.

And they don’t get to play the ‘big lie’ card just because they think voters are too stupid to remember what they have done over the years.

Republicans like Graham need to stop playing defense on this and point to how Democrats were discrediting elections long before Donald Trump ever did.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Lindsey Graham Cuts Deal With Bernie Sanders To Oppose ‘Election Deniers’ And ‘Defund The Police’ Candidates appeared first on The Political Insider.

After Filing For Re-Election, Poll Shows Liz Cheney Trailing By 30 Points

Posted on by Rusty Weiss

Liz Cheney officially filed for re-election and was promptly slapped with a poll showing her trailing her primary opponent by 30 percentage points.

Cheney announced on Thursday that she was seeking a fourth two-year term representing Wyoming’s at-large House seat.

“In Wyoming, we know what it means to ride for the brand. We live in the greatest nation God has ever created, and our brand is the U.S. Constitution,” she tweeted with an accompanying video announcement.

Added Cheney, “I’m running for re-election and asking for your vote because this is a fight we must win.”

She’s declaring concern for Wyoming when everyone has watched her on a 24/7 rampage against a man who’s no longer in office. Sorry, Liz, but your brand is Trump. Not the Constitution.

RELATED: Liz Cheney Accuses MAGA Republicans Of Being ‘Pro-Putin, Anti-Semitic, And White Nationalist’

Liz Cheney’s Re-Election Bid Takes a Hit Right Out of the Gate

Cheney’s main challenger in the primary, to be held in mid-August, is Harriet Hageman, a Wyoming attorney who has the backing of former President Donald Trump.

A new poll from the Club For Growth, a conservative organization opposing Cheney, shows her down a whopping 30 points to Hageman, with just 6% undecided.

The group hasn’t formally endorsed Hageman as Trump has.

Despite their conservative background, the poll according to Politico paints “the starkest illustration yet of the political peril Cheney faces this year.”

The outlet also states that the survey “is consistent with other data out of Wyoming in the last year.”

Cheney’s favorability ratings in another recent poll spell trouble for the anti-Trump Republican as well.

RELATED: Report: George W. Bush Donating To Republicans Who Voted To Impeach Trump

She’s ‘Courageous’

As a nice consolation prize for this devastating re-election news, Liz Cheney was recently awarded the John F. Kennedy Library Profile in Courage Award and praised by CNN for her speech.

During her oration, she ran down what makes her a terrific lawmaker and what she could do for her constituents in Wyoming.

Just kidding – she attacked Trump.

“This sacred obligation to defend the peaceful transfer of power has been honored by every American president but one,” she told the adoring crowd.

“Today that role is ours as we face a threat we have never faced before – a former President attempting to unravel our constitutional republic.”

Of course, the JFK Profile in Courage Award has been relegated to a less-than-prestigious honor over the years.

It rewards people for being anti-Trump or anti-conservative which, in a media landscape dominated by liberals, is actually a pretty easy thing to be.

Mitt Romney won in 2021 for his vote to convict Trump in 2020 in the Presidential Impeachment trial. The category for the award was ‘National Interest Over Party.’

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi won the same category in 2019 … for getting re-elected Speaker by pushing Democrat platforms.

Cheney didn’t win because of national interest over party. Nor did Romney, or Pelosi. The common thread is that all three pushed Democrat, anti-Trump rhetoric that elevated their stature in the eyes of the JFK Library.

The silver lining for Cheney? Once she’s ousted by Hageman in the Wyoming Republican primary, she’ll have plenty of time to sit at home and polish her new little award.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post After Filing For Re-Election, Poll Shows Liz Cheney Trailing By 30 Points appeared first on The Political Insider.

CNN National Security Analyst Calls For End Of Immigration Enforcement In Response To Texas School Shooting

Posted on by Rusty Weiss

CNN national security analyst and former member of Barack Obama’s Homeland Security Advisory Council, Juliette Kayyem, called for a halt to immigration enforcement in the area of Uvalde, Texas in response to the tragic school shooting.

Uvalde High School student Salvador Ramos is accused of murdering 22 people yesterday, including 19 children and 3 adults.

Kayyem, commenting on the “political issues in Texas” in an appearance on Jake Tapper’s “The Lead,” suggested the critical thing for everyone in the area right now is to have sanctuary.

“The most important thing for the federal government to do right now is to say there will be no immigration enforcement during this period in that area,” she claimed.

Kayyem noted that the demographics of the school district are overwhelmingly Hispanic.

“It has a large immigration population,” she continued. “You want parents with their kids; you don’t want people hiding right now, and we need to make that clear ASAP because of the political issues in Texas.”

RELATED: CNN Analyst And Former Obama DHS Official Demands Police Slash Tires, Arrest Canadian Truckers

CNN’s Response to School Shooting – Stop Enforcing Immigration Laws

CNN national security analyst Juliette Kayyem was so determined to make the point that suspension of immigration laws is the most important thing following the horrific shooting that she reiterated it moments later.

“We need the federal government to say right now, everyone is essentially safe harbor right now in terms of immigration status,” she declared, noting most illegal immigrants will avoid interaction with a heavy police presence in the area.

“We want to make sure that they know, despite all the politics going on in Texas right now, it’s the federal government that’s in charge of immigration enforcement,” she said.

“And people are safe. Get your kids, get your families together. Do not hide. The White House just needs to say that right now.”

RELATED: Kamala Harris, America’s Greatest Orator, Blesses Crowd With Latest Incomprehensible Gibberish

She Wanted Truckers Arrested

Kayyem sounded very different when talking about Canadian truckers earlier this year who were peacefully protesting against COVID mandates.

In fact, she wanted law enforcement to take drastic action.

“Slash the tires, empty gas tanks, arrest the drivers, and move the trucks,” Kayyem said.

Days after the Capitol riot, Kayyem referred to then-President Trump as the “leader of a terrorist organization.”

This is CNN.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post CNN National Security Analyst Calls For End Of Immigration Enforcement In Response To Texas School Shooting appeared first on The Political Insider.

January 6 Committee To Hold Public Hearings – Chairman Declares ‘The Public Needs to Know What to Think’

Posted on by Rusty Weiss

The House Select Committee investigating the January 6th riot at the Capitol is reportedly set to hold six public hearings – two in primetime – alleging former President Donald Trump and his associates broke the law in trying to overturn the 2020 election results.

The hearings will be held in June, according to the Guardian, which first reported the news.

Calling it a “pivotal political moment for the country,” the outlet reports that the panel will attempt to “publicly outline the potentially unlawful schemes that tried to keep the former president in office despite his defeat at the hands of Joe Biden.”

Congressman Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the select committee, gave the game away in his remarks regarding the public hearings about January 6th.

“We want to paint a picture as clear as possible as to what occurred,” Thompson (D-MS) told reporters. “The public needs to know what to think. We just have to show clearly what happened on January 6.”

RELATED: McConnell Agrees With Democrats, Media That January 6 Was A ‘Violent Insurrection,’ Rips RNC For Censuring Cheney, Kinzinger

Public Hearings on Capitol Riot

“The public needs to know what to think.”

Isn’t that the Democrat party Summed up completely in an 8-word sentence?

The biggest question on everyone’s mind is, with 6 public hearings ranging between 1.5 to 2.5 hours in length, will Adam Kinzinger have enough tissues on hand?

Rick Wilson, a one-time GOP strategist turned fervent Never Trumper, was also shedding tears over news that the January 6 committee would be holding 6 public hearings.

In Wilson’s eyes, that’s not enough.

“SIX HEARINGS? SIX? Are. You. F***ing. Kidding. Me?” he wrote.

In a follow-up tweet, Wilson claimed Trump witnesses would “filibuster, bulls***, evade and jerk themselves off on live TV” in an attempt to stonewall the hearings.

RELATED: Former AG Bill Barr Wants Republicans To ‘Move On’ From Trump, Blames Him For Capitol Riot

Setting Up the Narrative

Reports back in April indicated Thompson and the committee were prepared to hold eight public hearings on the January 6th riot at the Capitol.

So, according to the sources involved, this would be a streamlining of the attempts by the committee to influence opinions of what happened that day.

Aside from having the goal of telling the American people what to think, the June hearings will allow time for a full report to be released just in time for the midterm elections.

“The panel … plans to release a full report about the deadly attack on the Capitol in early fall,” CBS News reported at the time. 

Similar to Thompson’s comments, committee member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) said the public hearings would be divided into chapters “that will allow for the unfolding of the narrative.”

As any good work of fiction would.

Raskin, of course, never was the subject of a public hearing about trying to overturn election results, despite objecting to counting electoral votes back in 2016.

The Guardian reports that sources have indicated that “committee attorneys will simultaneously flash texts, photos and videos to illustrate the testimony” during these public hearings.

This will be interesting since this same House Select committee admitted to doctoring a text message presented by Representative Adam Schiff as evidence at a hearing back in December.

The Guardian report notes that “the exact content and timings of the hearings are still subject to change.”

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post January 6 Committee To Hold Public Hearings – Chairman Declares ‘The Public Needs to Know What to Think’ appeared first on The Political Insider.

Tuesday Was A Huge Night For Trump – And J.D. Vance

Posted on by RealClearWire

By Susan Crabtree for RealClearPolitics

In his 2016 bestselling autobiography “Hillbilly Elegy,” J.D. Vance thanks his grandparents – his “Mamaw” and “Remember in 2019 when workers were doing well in this country, not struggling terribly. Thanks [to] the president for everything, for endorsing me.”

Tuesday night, as Vance stepped closer to his goal of joining the most exclusive club in the country – the U.S. Senate – he thanked his grandparents again, along with President Trump.

“I absolutely gotta thank the 45th president of the United States, Donald J. Trump, for providing, ladies and gentlemen, an example of what could be in this country,” Vance, 37, said in his primary victory speech. “Remember in 2019 when workers doing well in this county, not struggling terribly, thanks for the president for everything, for endorsing me.”

RELATED: Trump Endorsement Vaults J.D. Vance To Top Of Contentious Ohio GOP Senate Primary Race

Vance then pulled a trademark Trump maneuver, slamming the “fake news media” for wanting to write a story that “this campaign would be the death of Donald Trump’s America First agenda … Ladies and gentlemen, it ain’t the death of the America First agenda.”

It’s been a heady, evolutionary six years for Vance, the Yale law school graduate and venture capitalist who burst on the scene with his book about growing up “dirt poor’ in Appalachia. Coastal elites immediately embraced his life story as a way to understand Trump’s appeal among the white working class.

During the 2016 campaign, though, Vance declared himself a Never Trumper, dubbing the casino-developer-turned-reality-TV-star-turned-politician “cultural heroin” for the masses, and argued he was leading working-class voters into a dark place.

However, during the Trump presidency, Vance shifted sharply to become an avid Trump supporter, citing the tumultuous Supreme Court confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh as a significant turning point. (His wife, Usha Chilukuri, had clerked for Kavanaugh when he was an appeals court judge.)

Meanwhile, Ohio transformed from a Republican-leaning swing state to a solidly red GOP bastion, supporting Trump by nine percentage points in 2016 and double digits in 2020.

Vance’s win brings to a close a crowded and contentious Republican contest to fill the seat of retiring GOP Sen. Rob Portman, a respected moderate. It also marks a major victory night for Trump, who has taken the unusual step for a former president of picking sides in primaries – a way to solidify his role as party kingmaker while he weighs another White House run in 2024.

Trump undoubtedly tilted the race in Vance’s favor. Before his endorsement, Vance was trailing former Ohio state treasurer Josh Mandel, another Trump acolyte, 28%-23%, according to the RealClearPolitics polling average of polls. Meanwhile, State Sen. Matt Dolan faded in the final stretch.

With more than 95% of the vote reporting late Tuesday night, Vance won 32.2% compared to Mandel’s 23.9% and Dolan’s 23.3%.

RELATED: There Are 11 Million Unfilled Jobs In America – Where Are The Workers?

Before and after Trump endorsed Vance, his GOP opponents spent millions of advertising dollars reminding voters that Vance had called himself a “Never Trumper” just a few years ago. The conservative Club for Growth’s sister PAC, which backed Mandel, funded an ad that Factcheck.org labeled “misleading” for suggesting that Vance had said some Trump supporters were motivated to back him because they are racist. In fact, the full Vance quote said most of Trump’s voters were inspired by his economic policies or “jobs, jobs, jobs.”

Peter Thiel, the billionaire founder of PayPal, channeled $13.5 million into a political action committee backing Vance in the race. Vance had worked for Theil as a venture capitalist in Silicon Valley before moving back to Ohio. Thiel, along with Trump, influenced Vance’s politics, especially when it comes to opposing China and placing stricter limits on immigration. Despite the infusion, Vance continued to run behind in the polls until Trump’s endorsement.

“The question presented in this primary was, ‘Do we want a border that protects our citizens? Do we want to ship our jobs to China or keep them right here in America for American workers? Do we want a Republican Party who stands for the donors who write checks to the Club for Growth or do we want the Republican Party for the people right here in Ohio?” he asked the crowd Tuesday evening.

Even though Trump’s endorsement inevitably boosted Vance’s candidacy, it wasn’t all smooth sailing. Just two days before the primary, Trump appeared to flub J.D. Vance’s name when citing his endorsement, seemingly merging it with Vance’s opponent’s last name. A Newsmax host claimed that it wasn’t a gaffe by Trump but a way to hedge his bets in the race.

“We’ve endorsed … J.P? Right?” Trump asked during his Ohio stumping on Vance’s part Sunday. “J.D. Mandel – and he’s doing great.”

On Monday, Vance minimized the gaffe, saying Trump speaks with such enthusiasm and so often that he was bound to “misspeak” sometimes. Vance now faces Democrat Rep. Tim Ryan, who handily won his party’s primary with 69.7%, with approximately 96.1 of the votes counted, according to the Associated Press.

Another big boon for Trump in Ohio Tuesday was the primary victory of Max Miller, a former Trump campaign and White House aide, who won the Republican nomination for the newly written 7th Congressional District in Northeast Ohio. Miller led the pack as of late Tuesday night despite abuse allegations from his ex-girlfriend, former White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham. Miller has denied it.

Miller was initially recruited to challenge Republican Rep. Anthony Gonzalez, one of 10 House Republicans who voted in favor of Trump’s impeachment. But Gonzalez opted to retire instead.

J.R. Majewski, an Air Force veteran who painted a giant “Trump 2020” sign on his front lawn ahead of the last presidential election, won a crowded GOP nomination and this fall will face Rep. Marcy Kaptur, the longest-serving woman in the history of the House of Representatives. (Kaptur was first elected in 1982.) Majewski defeated Theresa Gavarone, Craig Riedel, and Beth Decker.

RELATED: Repair Shop Owner Who Serviced Hunter Biden’s Laptop Files Lawsuit Against Adam Schiff, CNN

And in a close contest in Ohio’s 13th district, southeast of Cleveland, Madison Gesiotto Gilbert, a lawyer, political commentator, and former Miss Ohio whom Trump endorsed, is projected to win her crowded GOP primary, defeating six other Republicans. She will face Emilia Sykes, the former House minority leader, who ran unopposed in her primary.

At the top of the Ohio state ticket, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine also survived the primary even though he is considered a moderate who does not back Trump. Still, the crowded primary kept DeWine’s showing under 50% even though he has served in some elected capacity in the state for more than 40 years.

DeWine was widely criticized by Republicans over the state’s COVID shutdowns, drawing three Republican opponents, including U.S. Rep. Jim Renacci, former state Rep. Ron Hood, and farmer Joe Blyston. The three, however, split the Trump vote, leaving DeWine to pick up a solid 48.1% compared to Renacci’s 28%, Joe Blyston’s 21.8%, and Ron Hood’s 2.1%. DeWine will face Democrat Nan Whaley, the former mayor of Dayton in the general election.

Syndicated with permission from Real Clear Wire.

Susan Crabtree is RealClearPolitics’ White House/national political correspondent.

The post Tuesday Was A Huge Night For Trump – And J.D. Vance appeared first on The Political Insider.